Pubdate: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 Source: Dallas Morning News (TX) Copyright: 2002 The Dallas Morning News Contact: http://www.dallasnews.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/117 Author: Todd Bensman and Holly Becka / The Dallas Morning News Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/corrupt.htm (Corruption - United States) DRUG SCANDAL TAKES A TURN Lawyer Says Grand Jury Hearing Fake-Narcotic Suits; Indictments May Come Soon, Experts Say A federal grand jury has begun hearing from witnesses involved in a series of phony drug cases filed last year by the Dallas Police Department, says a defense lawyer for a confidential informant who has pleaded guilty in the cases. Legal experts say the convening of the grand jury could mean that the investigation is entering the final stage before indictments are issued. Others said federal law enforcement may be testing the credibility of three confidential informants who have pleaded guilty to civil rights violations. News of the grand jury comes amid word from a suspended police officer's attorney that federal prosecutors have told him investigators think Senior Cpl. Mark Delapaz was unaware the informants were planting fake drugs on innocent people. Attorney Bob Baskett's statement could not be confirmed with law enforcement officials, but if accurate, would give the first glimpse of what investigators have found in the 10 months since the inquiry began. "The government has told me that they do not believe the officers had any knowing participation in the fakeness of the drugs," Mr. Baskett said. "They said, 'We don't believe that you knew these informants were setting these people up with fake drugs.' They're investigating any ancillary kinds of issues that may come up, money and records and all that." Mr. Baskett was referring to pay vouchers that the informants allege were forged; sworn search warrant affidavits containing events that allegedly never occurred; and whether officers actually performed field tests on the seized evidence. Cpl. Delapaz and Officer Eddie Herrera were placed on paid leave after the FBI launched its investigation early this year. Officer Herrera's defense attorney, Kenny Kirby, said he was unaware of any grand jury testimony about or government interest in his client.The FBI also is investigating previous drug cases made by a third officer, Senior Cpl. David Larsen, because he accompanied Cpl. Delapaz and Officer Herrera on drug busts made with the discredited informants, said Dallas County District Attorney Bill Hill. Mr. Hill said his office reviewed and turned over to the FBI previous drug cases Cpl. Larsen made because the FBI wanted to ensure a thorough investigation. He declined to say whether the FBI had requested the cases of any other officers, but he said he is sure all of the tainted cases have been identified. Cpl. Larsen is still active in the Dallas police narcotics division. Mr. Baskett, who also represents Cpl. Larsen, said forwarding the cases of Officer Larsen and any other officer who worked in the narcotics unit last year would be routine and expected. Officer Larsen has not been tied to any case involving fake drugs, Mr. Baskett said.Cpl. Larsen also remains in good standing at the district attorney's office, Mr. Hill said. "Until we find conclusive evidence that he has done something wrong, we have no basis to do anything against him," Mr. Hill said. "We don't have any conclusive evidence that any police officer did anything wrong." Mr. Hill says that his office has put new safeguards in place to ensure such a scandal could never occur again with any police agency that files cases in Dallas County. Meanwhile, a former informant's lawyer says that at least three paid informants used by Dallas police narcotics officers in more than 80 cases that prosecutors later threw out have testified before the grand jury in recent weeks. Scheduled sentencing hearings for all three former informants have been postponed indefinitely. A judge will determine the value of their cooperation as part of the sentencing process. Enrique Alonso struck a plea deal in September to tell what he knows about police involvement in exchange for a lighter sentence. Mr. Alonso hired and paid other informants to help create fake drugs from pool chalk, or gypsum, and plant large quantities on innocent people, who then were arrested by his police handlers. Prosecutors face credibility problems in using Mr. Alonso as a witness against police, in part because he has given conflicting accounts about his role. Mr. Alonso's attorney declined to discuss what Mr. Alonso has told authorities or a grand jury. "He's given his word that he's going to cooperate fully, and he's honoring that obligation," attorney Barry Sorrels said. Karl Rupp, who represents Reyes Roberto Rodriguez, an informant who worked for Mr. Alonso, said his client has testified before the grand jury twice. Mr. Rodriguez has told investigators that sworn arrest warrant affidavits filed by officers and based on their personal surveillance contained accounts of events that the officers did not witness, suggesting that information was fabricated to get arrest warrants, Mr. Rupp said. Mr. Rodriguez repeated those statements to the grand jury, he said. "The focus ... is with respect to assertions of fact made in the police reports, whether things they said they saw happened are true," Mr. Rupp said. "There is a host of those where the answer is no." Mr. Baskett said he does not make much of the fact that the informants are testifying before a federal grand jury. "Sometimes, particularly in high-profile cases, a grand jury review is all part of the process," he said. "Keep in mind, if all they have against my clients are the word of these no-goods, these ne'er-do-wells trying to get themselves out of a lifetime of prison, I can't imagine anyone would think that's a case worth prosecuting." Attorney William Nellis, who represents informant Jose Ruiz-Serrano, has said his client had limited contact with police and could not testify that they directed the group's activities. He said Mr. Ruiz-Serrano has told authorities that police forged department pay vouchers for at least $24,000 he never saw. Dallas FBI Special Agent in Charge Guadalupe Gonzalez declined to discuss specifics of the investigation, when it would probably be finished or whether grand jury testimony was under way. Agent Gonzalez did say he recently added agents and analysts to the investigation "to ensure we cover every possible angle of that" more quickly. "This case is critical to us," he said. "We're trying to move it along as fast as possible." Some legal experts say the fact that important witnesses are testifying to a grand jury means the investigation may have matured to a phase that often produces criminal indictments. "When you start presenting live witnesses to a grand jury, it doesn't look good for the targets," said Dallas criminal defense attorney Billy Ravkind, who is not involved in the case. "It's definitely a strong indication that they are attempting to get an indictment." Sometimes prosecutors send witnesses to the grand jury to enhance the credibility of statements they've given to investigators and as a way to help the witnesses understand they can be more easily prosecuted for perjury if they are caught lying. "There are times when a prosecutor must use cooperating witnesses who are without clean hands," said former U.S. Attorney Marvin Collins. "Under those circumstances, occasionally a prosecutor may determine a witness should appear before the grand jury ... under oath so they know what they can rely on if a case is indicted and goes to trial." - --- MAP posted-by: Terry Liittschwager